rustdoc: Add more test coverage#97502
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @Mark-Simulacrum (or someone else) soon. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
camelid
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @onlineSoftwareDevOK, thanks for your PR!
I was more thinking that this would test re-exporting private_function a_nested_public_function in a_module and then in the top-level namespace.
However, this test seems useful as well! I left suggestions of how to extend it so it can test some more things too.
Also, could you run rustfmt on this file to fix the indentation? (We use 4 spaces in this repo.)
Feel free to ask for clarification on my comments.
|
By the way, when you're ready for more feedback, please post a comment with the content |
|
@rustbot ready |
|
Thanks for working on this! Looks good to me. Do you see anything else @camelid? |
|
Thanks! Please squash your commits then I'll approve it. |
59b2870 to
9292c90
Compare
Done. Thanks in advance! |
|
Thanks again! @bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 9292c90 has been approved by |
…=GuillaumeGomez rustdoc: Add more test coverage Related issue rust-lang#91113
…askrgr Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#97502 (rustdoc: Add more test coverage) - rust-lang#97627 (update explicit impls error msg) - rust-lang#97640 (Fix wrong suggestion for adding where clauses) - rust-lang#97645 (don't use a `span_note` for ignored impls) - rust-lang#97655 (Improve documentation for constructors of pinned `Box`es) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Related issue #91113